William Colby Quotes

In a sad twist of fate, the bill to reauthorize the Patriot Act was debated on the floor of the House of Representatives the same day that terrorists struck again.

A key reason that most Israeli counterterrorism policies have enjoyed sustained popular support is that they have been subjected to public debate.

Britain's anti-terror laws are an affront to democracy.

Democracies cannot be intimidated by terrorism.

States of Emergency ... can empower authorities to take sensible immediate steps to protect the public. But they do not represent a long-term answer. If measures such as the widespread deployment of soldiers on the streets persists for too long, authorities risk creating a new normal—–one that the public will think the terrorists imposed on them.

I think all members of Congress are very concerned about the fact that, while we want to see our law enforcement agencies have every means they can possibly have to combat terrorism, we've got to remember that we've had a Constitution in place for 225 years, and it has served us well.

Americans need to understand the significance of having their civil liberties dismantled. It doesn't just affect terrorists and foreigners, it affects us all.

Fighting a war on terrorism is like fighting against crime. We can never hope to eradicate crime, so we shouldn't bother fighting it.

We've got to understand that the whole nature of the way American democracy guards its freedom has been changed.

If the events of September 11, 2001, have proven anything, it's that the terrorists can attack us, but they can't take away what makes us American - our freedom, our liberty, our civil rights. No, only Attorney General John Ashcroft can do that.

We want our government to protect us, to make sure something like 9/11 never happens again. We quickly moved to give law enforcement more power to do this. But that now begs the question, did we move to fast? Did we give too much power away? I don't have the answer.

This thing called Patriot Act, through which we abdicated a lot of our civil rights to defend the country against terrorism, it's a four-year story.

Say what you will about Americans, but one thing they are not is passive. The Bush administration may have pushed through the Patriot Act weeks after 11 September, but, as the American public got to grips with how the law was affecting their individual rights, their protests grew loud and angry.

Our counterterrorism tools do not exist in a vacuum. They are stronger and more sustainable when the American people understand and support them. They are weaker and less sustainable when the American people do not.

It does not help when an administration, in response to American attacks on American soil and American individuals, the administration ends up asking Americans to give up their First Amendment rights for which our service members are fighting.

The free society tolerates those within it who would use that freedom to destroy it.

This administration and the people of Chicago have never condoned brutality at any time, but they will never permit a lawless violent group of terrorists to menace the lives of millions of people, destroy the purpose of this national political convention, and take over the streets of Chicago.

The fact that people gather with placards is abnormal. Other countries would not allow that. Our democracy is in many cases excessive.

We would not have a national discussion without the actions of Edward Snowden. Democracy is at work because of Edward Snowden.

We completely uphold the right of freedom of assembly. But there is always that important balance between security and freedom of expression in countries undergoing circumstances like ours.

I am ready to debate how we fight terrorism without giving up our liberty.

All have the right to speak, do whatever they want in democracy, but no one will be allowed to destabilise the country or create violence.

If we are going to remake society in the image of the fight against terrorism and put that secret fight at the heart of our democratic order - which is the way we're heading - we need to discuss it, and in public.

We must have the approach of 'zero tolerance' against any type of terrorism.

Curtailment of free speech is rationalized on grounds that a more compelling American tradition forbids criticism of the government when the nation is at war... Nothing can be more destructive of our fundamental democratic traditions than the vicious effort to silence dissenters.